Influence of sowing time and plant population on seed cotton yield

Journal of Research in Ecology

Journal of Research in Ecology

ISSN No: Print: 2319 –1546; Online: 2319– 1554

An International Scientific Research Journal

Original Research

Influence of sowing time and plant population on seed cotton yield Authors: Hafiz Ghanzafar Abbas1, Hasee-ur-Rehman2, Arif Malik3, Said Salman4 Qurban Ali3 and Abid Mahmood1

ABSTRACT: The present study was conducted to evaluate yield performance of cotton under various plant spacing by keeping normal to maximum plant population under four sowing dates. FH-NOOR cotton variety was sown in triplicate split-plot design having a net plot size measuring 5.45×3.78m, while keeping sowing dates as main-plot and plant populations as sub-plots. The results indicated that there was a significance difference among sowing dates, plant spacing and interaction between sowing dates Institution: and spacing for round all studied traits of cotton. It was found that the higher 1. Cotton Research Station performance of cotton genotype was recorded for 24 inch plant spacing and six inch Faisalabad, Ayub plant spacing for most of the studied traits under early and late sowing dates as Agricultural Research compared with intermediate sowing dates. The highest plant population was recorded Institute, Faisalabad, under six inch plant spacing and second date of sowing. The good fibre quality was Pakistan. found under 18 to 24 inch plant spacing under intermediate sowing dates. It was 2. Department of Agronomy, concluded from our study that the sowing date and plant spacing affects cotton yield Bahauddin Zakariya and quality of fibre, so there is a need to grow cotton plants under optimum University, Multan. agronomic practices.

3. Institute of Molecular Biology and Biotechnology, Keywords: Gossypium hirsutum, Seed cotton, Sowing times, Plant population, Fibre University of Lahore, strength.

Lahore, Pakistan.

4. Department of Plant Breeding & Genetics, Ghazi University, Dera Ghazi Khan, Pakistan.

Corresponding author: Qurban Ali Email ID:

Article Citation: Hafiz Ghanzafar Abbas, Hasee-ur-Rehman, Arif Malik, Qurban Ali and Abid Mahmood Influence of sowing time and plant population on seed cotton yield Journal of Research in Ecology (2018) 6(1): 1691-1702 Dates: Received: 21 April 2018 Accepted: 13 May 2018 Published: 06 June 2018 Web Address: http://ecologyresearch.info/ documents/EC0553.pdf Journal of Research in Ecology An International Scientific Research Journal

This article is governed by the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/ licenses/by/4.0), which gives permission for unrestricted use, non-commercial, distribution and reproduction in all medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

1691-1702| JRE | 2018 | Vol 6 | No 1

www.ecologyresearch.info

Abbas et al., 2018 enough to support germination requirement. Cotton is

INTRODUCTION Cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) is known as the

very responsive to environment because it is a perennial

world’s best trading crop because it plays a significant

crop which is sown annually (Shakeel et al., 2009).

role in uplifting country`s economy. More than fifty

Early plant sowing can cause poor germination and get

countries of the world are growing cotton in tropical

attacked by insect and pests which results in reduced

areas. In Pakistan, cotton gained importance due to its

growth, reduced flowers, less boll formation and ulti-

contribution with 1.5% in Gross Domestic Product

mately distinct loss in yield. Early sown cotton has more

(GDP) and 7.1% in agriculture (Anonymous, 2016).

vegetative growth than yield (Iqbal et al., 2012a). It also

th

rd

Pakistan is known to be the 4 producer and 3 con-

reaches to early reproductive plant growth during hot

sumer of cotton in the world. In Pakistan, Punjab and

months of the year causes serious yield loss (Rahman et

Sindh contribute 80% and 20% production of cotton

al., 2007).

respectively (Anonymous, 2016). Cotton is a cash crop

Late sowing have more negative effects on plant

which provides fibre, oil, fuel wood and contributes a

like burning of seedlings due to hot weather (heat

major part in the income of farmers of Pakistan. Cotton

stress), stunted growth which results in poor vegetation,

textile sectors play an important role in the national eco-

reduction in sympodial branches, reduced flowering and

nomic stream and proved to reduce poverty (Cororaton

hence reduction in bolls per plant ultimately. Plant

and Orden, 2008). Textile industry depends upon raw

won’t get enough time to complete its phases and will

material provided by local grown cotton, about 63%

try to complete with rapid speed and shorten its growth

need for edible oil in Pakistan is met by its seed (Iqbal

and reproductive stages. Late sowing also causes flow-

et al., 2012a). Cotton is also used in pharmaceutical

ering and maturity in cold season which harms the yield

products like tarpaulin, cordage and belting.

(Elayan et al., 2015). Karavina et al. (2012) stated that

Demand depends upon quality. Quality product

sowing time severely affects the management of insect/

can support textile industry and can be exported to other

pest. Interaction of cultivar with sowing time is an im-

countries which results increase in income, reduces pov-

portant strategy to determine yield and quality in a spe-

erty and support the nation’s economy. Condition of

cific environment (Campbell and Jones, 2005). Yield

yield can get poor due to many biotic and abiotic factors

potential and fibre quality of cotton genotypes can be

such as weed infestation, insect pest, sowing too early

evaluated through sowing under different dates. Selec-

or too late, improper use of genotypes according to the

tion of genotype and proper sowing time increase vege-

existing environment (Arshad et al., 2007; Abbas et al.,

tative growth, buds, nodes, flowers, bolls per plant and

2016ab; Zia-ul-Hassan et al., 2014). Cotton yield reduc-

ultimately these factors will increase yield to a great

tion in Pakistan is due to many problems like improper

extent and quality of product like fibre, oil etc. (Abbas

nutrition, attack of insect and pests, reduced plant popu-

et al., 2015; Deho et al., 2012).

lation, irrigation, poor germination but two agronomic

Plant population severely affects the yield. Opti-

practices cause major reduction if not managed proper-

mum population of plants not only provide better yield

ly, sowing time and plant population. Sowing time is the

but it also save inputs (Nadeem et al., 2010). Plant pop-

most important factor of yield reduction because if crop

ulation also affects the quantity and quality of fibre

is not sown on proper time, it will not get suitable envi-

(Wrather et al., 2008). Bednarz et al. (2006) reported

ronment. Cotton seed needs warm soil condition and

about the problems like boll rot, increase plant height

sowing should be started as the temperature is warm

and delay maturity, fruit shedding and flower shedding

1692

Journal of Research in Ecology (2018) 6(1): 1691–1702

0.7612

6.021

1.0072 1.2343

29.843 3211

2.8732

39216

0.00141ns 0.20456* 0.06308* 0.06412* 0.00150 0.04206ns 2.03006* 2.54183* 2.80217* 0.02918

0.0652 2.3412 0.0545

1.127 114.371 4.431

1.0208ns 41.8611* 2.3611* 2.4352* 0.5097

1.637E+07ns 6.077E+07* 3.440E+09* 9.804E+07* 2.758E+07

the importance of relation between sowing time with suitable plant population, present study was planned to attain following objectives: To determine the optimum sowing time for a specific cultivar. 

To explore the potential yield of cultivar by sowing them at different densities.

1104.77ns 1529.81* 787.14* 209.60ns 169.50 0.00180ns 0.82602* 0.33065* 0.24124* 0.00061

impact on quality (Siebert et al., 2006). Keeping in view



CLCV %

Plant population/ha

of plant population can provide maximum bolls per plant which results better lint production as well as great

Plant height (cm) Boll weight (g)

caused by extra dense population. Proper management



To investigate the impact of sowing date and plant density on seed cotton yield.

MATERIALS AND METHODS The present study was conducted to evaluate yield performance of cotton under various plant spacing by keeping normal to maximum plant population under

0.9756 0.0082

37.412 1.571

Experimental details The experiment replicated thrice and was laid out according to split-plot design having a net plot size measuring 5.45×3.78m. The sowing dates were random-

0.8652

22.571

ized as main-plots and plant populations as sub-plots.

FH-NOOR was used as an experimental material.

Crop husbandry

1.0965

Slight irrigation was applied to create favoura82.811

28.77ns 1072.13* 322.91* 93.11* 31.59 0.896ns 135.333* 7.222* 2.778* 4.407 0.14583ns 5.07639* 9.29861* 0.42824* 0.72361

0.20828ns 2.55419* 2.13332* 0.26208ns 0.15946

Sympodial branches 1st Boll opening

Monopodial branches

Number of bolls

four sowing dates.

ble condition for seedbed preparation. At field capacity, field was cultivated with tractor mounted cultivator

Error

Grand 29.871 48.769 mean Standard 0.2352 1.2056 error *=significant (P 0.05); ns=non-significant

0.0625ns 23.2500* 1.4722ns 2.5648* 0.9292 0.14583ns 2.05556* 0.38889ns 0.66667* 0.70139 2 3 3 9 3 0 Replication Days Spacing D×S

df

Days taken to 1st bud

Days taken to 1st flower

along with planking. FH-NOOR was sown on four dif-

Source

Table 1. ANOVA Table for plant population and cotton planting date and their effects on cotton seed yield and fibre quality

Seed cotton yield (kg)/ha 691217ns 9402426* 3164103* 322616* 173978

Fibre length (cm)

Fibre fineness

Abbas et al., 2018

Journal of Research in Ecology (2018) 6(1): 1691–1702

ferent

dates (15-April, 1-May, 15-May and 1-June)

with different spacing (24, 18, 12 and 6 inches). The crop was sown on beds with hand chopa by using 20kg/ ha fuzzy seed. Slight irrigation was applied in order to have successful germination. The crop was fertilized at 150-100-50 kg NPK/ha. All other agronomic and entomological practices were kept uniform and normal. The yield data recorded was analysed by using analysis of

1693

Abbas et al., 2018 Table 2. Comparison of treatment means for plant population and the effect of cotton planting dates on seed cotton yield and fibre quality (days taken for 1 st bud) Days of sowing D1 D2 D3 D4 Mean

S. No 1 2 3 4 5

S1 29.667abc 29.667abc 30.000abc 31.000a 30.083A

S2 30.000abc 29.667abc 30.000abc 29.667abc 29.833A

Plant spacing S3 29.667abc 29.333bc 29.667abc 30.000abc 29.667A

S4 29.333bc 28.667c 30.667ab 30.333ab 29.750A

Mean 29.667AB 29.333B 30.083A 30.250A

Means sharing the different letters are significantly different from each other’s at 0.05%.

S1=24 inch plant spacing; S2= 18 inch plant spacing; S3= 12 inch plant spacing; S4=6 inch plant spacing; D1=15-04-2016; D2=01-05-2016; D3=15-05-2016; D4=01-06-2016

Significantly a maximum of 50.00 (1st flower)

variance technique (Steel, 1997).

data was recorded when sowing date and plant spacing was used as 01-June at 12 and 6 inch both. Significantly

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION The results presented in Table 1 show the signif-

a less data of 44.66 (1st flower) was recorded which was

icant effect of sowing date on 1st bud emergence. Inter-

statistically in par with 46.00 when sowing date and

action of sowing date with plant spacing had significant-

plant spacing were used as 15-April at 6 inch and 15-

st

ly promoted 1 bud emergence of cotton. The signifist

April at 18 inch respectively. Early sown cultivar with

cant effects of sowing date on formation of 1 flower of

proper spacing promote early bud formation which ulti-

cotton were recorded while plant spacing had no signifi-

mately produce early flowering and hence initiates early

st

cant effect on 1 flower formation. Interaction of sow-

boll formation and opening thus can prevent 25% shed-

ing date and plant spacing significantly affected the

ding (Table 3). These conclusions are similar to the

st

formation of 1 flower of cotton. It was found from the

findings of Farrukh et al. (2009), Deho et al. (2012),

results that maximum 31.00 days were taken to 1st bud

Khan et al. (2015) and Ullah et al. (2012).

under sowing date and plant spacing of 01-June at 24

The Table 4 presented data about 1st boll open-

inch. Significantly least value was recorded as 28.66th

ing of cotton. Date of sowing had significant effect on

sowing date (1 May) and plant spacing (6 inch) were

1st boll opening. Significantly maximum value 83.25

used. Plant spacing had no significant effect on 1 st bud

was recorded when sowing date was 01-May. Signifi-

emergence (Table 2). As early sown varieties affect

cantly least value 81.83 was recorded by using sowing

sympodial branches it ultimately affects early emer-

date as 01-June which was statistically in par with 82.41

st

gence of 1 bud which was also confirmed by the find-

at 15-May. Plant spacing also significantly affects the

ings of Farrukh et al. (2009) and Deho et al. (2012).

1st boll opening. Significantly maximum value was at-

Table 3. Comparison of treatment means for plant population and the effect of cotton planting dates on seed cotton yield and fibre quality (1st flower) S. No 1 2 3 4 5

Days of sowing D1 D2 D3 D4 Mean

S1 48.333bcd 48.667abc 48.000cd 49.333abc 48.583A

S2 46.000ef 48.667abc 48.333bcd 49.667ab 48.167A

Plant spacing S3 S4 47.000de 44.667f 50.000a 48.667abc cd 48.000 48.667abc 50.000a 50.000a A 48.750 48.000A

Mean 46.500C 49.000AB 48.250B 49.750A

Means sharing the different letters are significantly different from each other’s at 0.05%.

S1=24 inch plant spacing; S2= 18 inch plant spacing; S3= 12 inch plant spacing; S4=6 inch plant spacing; D1=15-04-2016; D2=01-05-2016; D3=15-05-2016; D4=01-06-2016

1694

Journal of Research in Ecology (2018) 6(1): 1691–1702

Abbas et al., 2018 Table 4. Comparison of treatment means for plant population and the effect of cotton planting dates on seed cotton yield and fibre quality (1st boll opening) S. No 1 2 3 4 5

Days of sowing D1 D2 D3 D4 Mean

S1 82.333bcde 84.000a 82.000cdef 81.667defg 82.500A

S2 82.333bcde 83.333abc 83.000abcd 82.333bcde 82.750A

Plant spacing S3 82.667abcde 83.667ab 83.333abc 82.667abcde 83.083A

S4 80.333g 82.000cdef 81.333efg 80.667fg 81.083B

Mean 81.917B 83.250A 82.417B 81.833B

Means sharing the different letters are significantly different from each other’s at 0.05%.

S1=24 inch plant spacing; S2= 18 inch plant spacing; S3= 12 inch plant spacing S4=6 inch plant spacing; D1=15-04-2016; D2=01-05-2016; D3=15-05-2016; D4=01-06-2016

tained as 83.08 which were statistically in par with

significant effect on sympodial branches of cotton, even

82.50 when spacing was used as 12 and 24 inch respec-

when we use plant spacing as a sole factor, it had no

tively. The least significant results were recorded as

significant response as well. These results are confirmed

81.08 when 6 inch spacing was used. Interaction of

by the findings of the following researchers. Elongated

sowing date and plant spacing had no significant effect

plant height allows more sympodial branches to grow as

st

on 1 boll opening of cotton. Plant spacing and sowing st

compared to short statured plants, when subjected to

date trigger 1 boll opening which may be due to early

early sowing condition. Khan et al. (2015) reported that

sown the variety reached to its physiological maturity

sympodial branches are boll bearing branches, so more

early by getting more suitable temperature, environment

the sympodial branches there will be more bolls per

and optimum plant to plant space which supports the

plant which contributes in yield enhancement. This phe-

plant to express its growth without any disturbance as

nomena is applicable for same cultivars. Sympodial

compared to the late and narrow sown varieties. These

branches and boll bearing also depends upon genetic

results are similar with the findings of Iqbal et al.

makeup which is different in different cultivars and time

(2012b) and Deho et al. (2012).

of sowing and have no impact (Deho et al., 2012;

The results from Table 5 show about the signifi-

Batool et al., 2010).

cant effect of sowing date on sympodial branches of

Results from table 6 show that date of sowing

cotton. Significantly a maximum data of 23.50

had significant effect on monopodial branches. Signifi-

(sympodial branches) was recorded when date of sow-

cantly maximum value was achieved as 1.62 when crop

ing was used as 15-April. Least significant value was

was sown at 15-April which was statistically at par with

recorded as 15.50 while using sowing date as 01-June.

1.31 where sowing date was 01-May. Significantly least

Interaction of sowing date and plant spacing had no

value of monopodial was achieved at 0.69 which was

Table 5. Comparison of treatment means for plant population and the effect of cotton planting dates on seed cotton yield and fibre quality (sympodial branches) S. No

Days of sowing

1 2 3 4 5

D1 D2 D3 D4 Mean

S1 23.000abc 20.000bcde 18.333def 15.667fg 19.250A

S2 24.333a 19.667cde 18.333def 14.000g 19.083A

Plant spacing S3 23.333ab 22.667abc 20.333bcde 15.333fg 20.417A

S4 23.333ab 21.667abcd 20.333bcde 17.000efg 20.583A

Mean 23.500A 21.000B 19.333B 15.500C

Means sharing the different letters are significantly different from each other’s at 0.05%.

S1=24 inch plant spacing; S2= 18 inch plant spacing; S3= 12 inch plant spacing; S4=6 inch plant spacing; D1=15-04-2016; D2=01-05-2016; D3=15-05-2016; D4=01-06-2016

Journal of Research in Ecology (2018) 6(1): 1691–1702

1695

Abbas et al., 2018 Table 6. Comparison of treatment means for plant population and the effect of cotton planting dates on seed cotton yield and fibre quality (Monopodial branches) S. No

Days of sowing

1 2 3 4 5

D1 D2 D3 D4 Mean

S1 1.7733abc 1.1600cde 0.3300fg 1.2200bcde 1.1208B

S2 1.8633ab 1.9967a 1.4400abcd 0.8833def 1.5458A

Plant spacing S3 1.7733abc 1.4433abcd 0.6633efg 0.7733ef 1.1633B

S4 1.1067de 0.6633efg 0.3300fg 0.0000g 0.5250C

Mean 1.6292A 1.3158A 0.6908B 0.7192B

Means sharing the different letters are significantly different from each other’s at 0.05%.

S1=24 inch plant spacing; S2= 18 inch plant spacing; S3= 12 inch plant spacing; S4=6 inch plant spacing; D1=15-04-2016; D2=01-05-2016; D3=15-05-2016; D4=01-06-2016.

statistically in par with 0.71 when date of sowing was

ing and sowing date had significantly affected the num-

used as 15-May and 01-June respectively. Data in given

ber of bolls per plant. Significantly a maximum value of

table also showed significant results of plant spacing on

58.66 was recorded when sowing date and plant spacing

monopodial branches. Significantly a maximum value

was used as 15-April at 24 inch. Whereas least signifi-

1.54 was achieved at 18 inch spacing, while least signif-

cant value was recorded as 17.33 where 01-June at 6

icant value was achieved as 0.52 at 6 inch plant spacing.

inch sowing date and plant spacing were used. Out of

Interaction of sowing date and plant spacing had no

the many factors it might be one of them that bolls per

significant effect on the monopodial branches. Monopo-

plant increases as an increase in the sympodial branch-

dial branches are greatly affected by the sowing time

es. Khalid et al. (2016) reported that there is an increase

because early sown varieties are subjected to that tem-

in 25% bolls per plant in early sown cotton cultivars and

perature and solar duration that physiologically affected

have less boll shedding per plant which ultimately sup-

the monopodial branches in a positive manner. On the

ported yield enhancement. Ali et al. (2009) reported that

other hand, plant spacing allowed plant to grow its can-

due to moderate temperature of environment for early

opy according to its potential due to this, plant can pro-

sown variety; photosynthates were translocated easily

mote its monopodial branches. These results are in line

which fulfilled plant nutrient needs that support more

with the findings of Ullah et al. (2012).

number of bolls. These results are also confirmed by the

The results provided in Table 7 show that number of bolls were significantly enhanced by the effect of sowing date and plant spacing. Interaction of plant spac-

findings of Ullah et al. (2012), Hakoomat et al. (2011), Iqbal et al. (2012b) and Deho et al. (2012).

The data provided in Table 8 show the signifi-

Table 7. Comparison of treatment means for plant population and the effect of cotton planting dates on seed cotton yield and fibre quality (number of bolls) S. No 1

Days of sowing D1

S1 58.667a

S2 42.000b

2 3 4 5

D2 D3 D4 Mean

33.000bcde 24.333efg 27.667ef 35.917A

38.667bcd 27.000ef 25.333efg 33.250A

Plant spacing S3 S4 bc 39.667 32.000cde 38.000bcd 29.333de 18.667fg 31.417A

26.667efg 19.333fg 17.333g 23.833B

Mean 43.083A 34.083B 25.000C 22.250C

Means sharing the different letters are significantly different from each other’s at 0.05%.

S1=24 inch plant spacing; S2= 18 inch plant spacing; S3= 12 inch plant spacing; S4=6 inch plant spacing; D1=15-04-2016 D2=01-05-2016; D3=15-05-2016; D4=01-06-2016

1696

Journal of Research in Ecology (2018) 6(1): 1691–1702

Abbas et al., 2018 Table 8. Comparison of treatment means for plant population and the effect of cotton planting dates on seed cotton yield and fibre quality (boll weight (g)) S. No 1 2 3 4 5

Days of sowing D1 D2 D3 D4 Mean

S1

Plant spacing S3

S2 k

3.9567 4.1333i 5.0060a 4.3340g 4.3575D

h

f

4.2200 4.6700ef 4.7333d 4.3470g 4.4926C

4.6300 4.7000de 4.7967c 4.0167j 4.5358B

S4

Mean a

5.0290 4.8067c 4.9367b 4.2563h 4.7572A

4.4589C 4.5775B 4.8682A 4.2385D

Means sharing the different letters are significantly different from each other’s at 0.05%.

S1=24 inch plant spacing; S2= 18 inch plant spacing; S3= 12 inch plant spacing; S4=6 inch plant spacing; D1=15-04-2016 D2=01-05-2016; D3=15-05-2016; D4=01-06-2016

cant effect on boll weight of cotton when different sow-

May. Significantly less plant height 99.42cm was rec-

ing dates and plant spacing were used. The interaction

orded at 01-June which was statistically in par with 15-

of sowing date and plant spacing had a huge positive

May where 109.0cm height of plant was obtained. Data

effect on boll weight of cotton. Significantly maximum

presented in above given table showed that plant popu-

boll weight was obtained 5.02 in 15-April at 6 inch sow-

lation had significant effect on the plant height of cot-

ing date and plant spacing was used which were statisti-

ton. Significantly maximum plant height 123.83cm was

cally at par with 5.00 when sowing date and plant spac-

recorded when plant population was 87120 plant/ha and

ing was used as 15-May at 24 inch. Significant boll

it was statistically in par with 113.67cm plant height

weight (3.95g) was obtained when sowing date and

where plant population (43560 plant/ha) was recorded.

plant spacing were used as 15-April at 24 inch. Due to

Significantly less plant height (93.33cm) was recorded

moderate temperature of the environment for early sown

which had 29040 plant/ha and was statistically in par

variety, photosynthates were translocated easily which

with 21780 plants/ha which had plant height (97.33cm).

fulfilled plant nutrient needs due to which accumulation

Interaction of sowing date on different plant spacing had

in boll is enough to support better lint production. These

no significant effect on the plant height. The plant

results were also conformed by the findings of Ali et al.

height depends upon the genetics of cultivar (Batool et

(2009), Deho et al. (2012) and Hakoomat et al. (2011).

al., 2010). Height of plant mainly depends upon existing

The data presented in Table 9 show that the time

environmental conditions. Early sown varieties have

of sowing had significant effect on the plant height of

more plant height as compared to the late sown because

cotton. Significantly maximum 126.08 cm plant height

early varieties have more duration of growth than late

was recorded in 15-April and it was statistically in par

ones. The above given results were confirmed by the

with the plant height 116.33cm at the sowing date 01-

findings of Hakoomat et al. (2011), Ullah et al. (2011),

Table 9. Comparison of treatment means for plant population and the effect of cotton planting dates on seed cotton yield and fibre quality (plant height (cm)) S. No 1 2 3 4 5

Days of sowing D1 D2 D3 D4 Mean

S1 113.0bcde 113.67bcde 99.67def 97.33def 105.92B

S2 124.33abc 109.67bcdef 103.0cddef 93.33ef 107.58B

Plant spacing S3 S4 123.67abc 143.33a 116.67bcd 125.33ab abc 124.00 109.33bcdef f 89.67 117.33bcd AB 113.50 123.83A

Mean 126.08A 116.33AB 109.0BC 99.42C

Means sharing the different letters are significantly different from each other’s at 0.05%.

S1=24 inch plant spacing; S2= 18 inch plant spacing; S3= 12 inch plant spacing; S4=6 inch plant spacing; D1=15-04-2016 D2=01-05-2016; D3=15-05-2016; D4=01-06-2016.

Journal of Research in Ecology (2018) 6(1): 1691–1702

1697

Abbas et al., 2018 Table 10. Comparison of treatment means for plant population and the effect of cotton planting dates on seed cotton yield and fibre quality (CLCV%)

1 2 3

Days of sowing D1 D2 D3

S1 0.0000d 0.0000d 0.3333d

S2 0.0000d 0.0000d 0.6667cd

Plant spacing S3 S4 0.0000d 0.0000d 0.0000d 0.0000d d 0.0000 O.3333d

4 5

D4 Mean

1.6667c 0.5000B

3.6667b 1.0833AB

4.0000b 1.0000AB

S. No

6.0000a 1.5833A

Mean 0.0000B 0.0000B 0.3333B 3.8333A

Means sharing the different letters are significantly different from each other’s at 0.05%.

S1=24 inch plant spacing; S2= 18 inch plant spacing; S3= 12 inch plant spacing; S4=6 inch plant spacing; D1=15-04-2016 D2=01-05-2016; D3=15-05-2016; D4=01-06-2016

Iqbal et al. (2012a) and Deho et al. (2012).

findings of Muddassir et al. (2016).

The results presented in Table 10 show that

The results from Table 11 show that date of

sowing date and plant spacing had significant results on

sowing had no effect on plant population while plant

eradication of Cotton Leaf Curl Virus (CLCV) of cot-

spacing significantly affect the population of cotton

ton. Interaction of different sowing dates with various

plants. Interaction of plant spacing with different sow-

plant spacing successfully eradicates CLCV. Signifi-

ing dates had significantly provided better plant popula-

cantly maximum CLCV was recorded as 6.00 when

tion. Significantly maximum plant population was

sowing date and plant spacing were as 01-June and 6

achieved as 70180 when sowing date and plant spacing

inch. Significantly least CLCV was detected as 0.00

were 15-April and 6 inch. Least significant density was

which was statistically on par with 0.66 when sowing

achieved as 17747 which were statistically in par with

date and plant spacing were 15-April and 24 inch; 15-

26055 when sowing date and plant spacing were 15-

May and 18 inch respectively. It is in the genetics of the

April and 24 inch; 01-June and 18 inch respectively.

plant to protect itself from virus and other diseases

Plant spacing is crucial to get proper plant population.

(Batool et al., 2010). Early sown varieties have mini-

More or less than a optimum limit, it causes reduction in

mum virus infestation that might be due to available

yield, quality and quantity (Hakoomat et al., 2011).

temperature and other environmental conditions as com-

Proper plant population can save input cost and help

pared with late sown varieties because early sown varie-

plant to perform better in the existing environment as it

ties are subjected to that temperature in which virus is

gets better light, water and air. These findings were sup-

inactive and plants get enough time to get mature and

ported by the work of Siebert et al. (2006), Elayan et al.

protect themselves. These results are confirmed by the

(2015), Karavina et al. (2012) and Nadeem et al.

Table 11. Comparison of treatment means for plant population and the effect of cotton planting dates on seed cotton yield and fibre quality (plant population/ha) S. No 1 2 3 4 5

Days of sowing D1 D2 D3 D4 Mean

S1 17747g 20973fg 17747g 20973fg 19360D

S2 26620f 27911ef 29040ef 26055fg 27407C

Plant spacing S3 35493de 41947cd 39527cd 37913cd 38720B

S4 70180a 60177b 45173c 58080b 58403A

Mean 37510A 37752A 32872B 35755AB

Means sharing the different letters are significantly different from each other’s at 0.05%.

S1=24 inch plant spacing; S2= 18 inch plant spacing; S3= 12 inch plant spacing; S4=6 inch plant spacing; D1=15-04-2016 D2=01-05-2016; D3=15-05-2016; D4=01-06-2016

1698

Journal of Research in Ecology (2018) 6(1): 1691–1702

Abbas et al., 2018 Table 12. Comparison of treatment means for plant population and the effect of cotton planting dates on seed cotton yield and fibre quality (seed cotton yield (kg/ha)) Days of Plant spacing S. No sowing S1 S2 S3 S4 Mean 1

D1

3359.3cd

3603.3bc

4190.0ab

4745.0a

3974.4A

2 3 4 5

D2 D3 D4 Mean

3064.7cde 2379.0ef 1742.0fg 2636.2C

3581.3bc 3234.3cd 1621.0g 3010.0B

3718.7bc 3468.3c 1952.0fg 3332.3B

4758.7a 3121.3cd 2766.7de 3847.9A

3780.8A 3050.7B 2020.4C

Means sharing the different letters are significantly different from each other’s at 0.05%.

S1=24 inch plant spacing; S2= 18 inch plant spacing; S3= 12 inch plant spacing; S4=6 inch plant spacing; D1=15-04-2016; D2=01-05-2016; D3=15-05-2016; D4=01-06-2016

Table 13. Comparison of treatment means for plant population and the effect of cotton planting dates on seed cotton yield and fibre quality (fibre length (mm)) S. No 1 2 3 4 5

Days of sowing D1 D2 D3 D4 Mean

S1 28.443fg 28.220g 29.933b 29.810b 29.102B

S2 28.790de 29.953b 30.697a 30.567a 30.002A

Plant spacing S3 29.303c 30.537a 27.767h 28.550ef 29.039B

S4 28.277fg 29.287c 30.007b 28.867d 29.109B

Mean 28.703C 29.499AB 29.601A 29.448B

Means sharing the different letters are significantly different from each other’s at 0.05%.

S1=24 inch plant spacing; S2= 18 inch plant spacing; S3= 12 inch plant spacing; S4=6 inch plant spacing; D1=15-04-2016; D2=01-05-2016; D3=15-05-2016; D4=01-06-2016

(2010).

2636.2kg/ha where plant spacing was used as 24 inch.

The results provided in Table 12 showed that

Interaction of sowing date and plant spacing had no

date of sowing had significant effect on cotton seed

significant effect on cotton seed yield. Cotton seed yield

yield. Significantly maximum cotton seed yield was

might be affected the by time of sowing as well as pop-

recorded as 3974.4kg/ha which was statistically on par

ulation. If a crop is sown on proper time it will get suita-

with 3780.8kg/ha where sowing date were 15-April and

ble environment which trigger photosynthetic activity in

01-May respectively. Significantly less cotton seed

plant that supports more food production which ulti-

yield was recorded as 2020.4kg/ha where crop was

mately help the plant to express its potential. On the

sown at 01-June. Plant spacing also significantly in-

other hand plant population is directly proportional to

creased seed cotton yield, maximum value was obtained

yield, because more the plants there will be more

as 3847.9kg/ha where plant spacing was used as 6 inch.

branches, leaves, bolls which produce lint and seed. So

Significantly least cotton seed yield was recorded as

proper time and population not only increase the cotton

Table 14. Comparison of treatment means for plant population and the effect of cotton planting dates on seed cotton yield and fibre quality (fibre fineness (µg/inch)) S. No 1 2 3 4 5

Days of sowing D1 D2 D3 D4 Mean

S1 6.0833c 6.4100a 5.8600ef 5.8667e 6.0550a

S2 5.8300efg 6.1733b 5.9567d 5.8000fg 5.9400b

Plant spacing S3 5.8333ef 6.0500c 5.9567d 5.7667g 5.9017c

S4 5.8333ef 6.0600c 6.0433c 6.1800b 6.0292a

Mean 5.8950c 6.1733a 5.9542b 5.9033c

Means sharing the different letters are significantly different from each other’s at 0.05%.

S1=24 inch plant spacing; S2= 18 inch plant spacing; S3= 12 inch plant spacing; S4=6 inch plant spacing; D1=15-04-2016; D2=01-05-2016; D3=15-05-2016; D4=01-06-2016

Journal of Research in Ecology (2018) 6(1): 1691–1702

1699

Abbas et al., 2018 seed yield but also provide better quality products. The-

(2011).

se findings are supported by the work of Ullah et al.

(2011), Hakoomat et al. (2011) and Nadeem et al.

CONCLUSION

(2010).

Our study concluded that the sowing date and The results from Table 13 showed that date of

plant spacing affects cotton yield and quality of fibre, so

sowing and different plant spacing had significant effect

there is a need to grow cotton plants under optimum

on the fibre length of cotton. According to the given

agronomic practices.

data, the interaction of maximum fibre length 30.69, 30.56 and 30.53 were recorded at 15-May and 18 inch;

REFERENCES

01-June and 18 inch; 01-May and 12 inch date of sow-

Abbas HG, Mahmood A and Ali Q. 2015. Genetic

ing and plant spacing respectively. Significantly less

variability and correlation analysis for various yield

fibre length 28.22 was recorded at 01-May and 24 inch

traits of cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.). Journal of

which was statistically on par with 28.44 where 15-

Agricultural Research, 53(4):481-91.

April and 24 inch date of sowing and plant spacing were used. Fibre length was affected due to physiological changes imposed by the environment. When suitable temperature and space were given to the plant, photo-

Abbas HG, Mahmood A and Ali Q. 2016a. Zero tillage: a potential technology to improve cotton yield.

Genetika, 48(2): 761-776.

synthetic assimilation provide optimum energy to fulfil

Abbas GH, Shahid MR, Mahmood A and Ali Q.

all the needs which results better fibre length (Ullah

2016b. Characterization of plant spacing best fit for

et al., 2011). These results are confirmed by the findings

economic yield, fiber quality, whitefly and CLCuV dis-

of Deho et al. (2012) and Wrather et al. (2008).

ease management on upland cotton. Nature and Science,

The results presented in Table 14 showed that different sowing dates and plant population significantly effect fibre fineness of cotton. According to the provided data it is concluded that interaction of sowing dates and plant population had significant effect on fibre fineness. Significantly maximum fibre fineness 6.41 data

14(5):12-16.

Arshad M, Wajid A, Maqsood M, Hussain K, Aslam M and Ibrahim M. 2007. Response of growth, yield and quality of different cotton cultivars to sowing dates.

Pakistan Journal Agricultural Science, 44(2): 208-212.

was recorded at 01-April and 24 inch sowing date and

Ali H, Afzal MN and Muhammad D. 2009. Effect of

plant spacing. Significantly less fibre fineness was rec-

sowing dates and plant spacing on growth and dry mat-

orded as 5.76 which was statistically on par with 5.80

ter partitioning in cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.).

when sowing date and plant spacing were 01-June and

Pakistan Journal Botany, 41(5): 2145-2155.

12 inch; 01-June and 18 inch respectively. Though there are many requirements but when a crop is sown on the proper time and place then it performs well in many aspects and demand of energy is fulfilled when required

Anonymous. 2016. Economic survey of Pakistan. Ministry of food, Agriculture and Livestock, Government of Pakistan, Finance Division. Islambad. 19-40p.

agronomic practices were uniform. It supports ideal

Batool S, Khan NU, Makhdoom K, Bibi Z, Hassan

growth which results better quality and quantity of the

G,

fibre. These results are conformed by the findings of

Raziuddin and Khan IA. 2010. Heritability and genet-

Siebert et al. (2006), Deho et al. (2012) and Ullah et al.,

ic potential of upland cotton genotypes for morpho-

1700

Marwat

KB,

Farhatullah

F,

Mohammad,

Journal of Research in Ecology (2018) 6(1): 1691–1702

Abbas et al., 2018 yield traits. Pakistan Journal Botany, 42(2): 1057-1064 Bednarz GW, Nichols RL and Brown SM. 2006.

Plant density modification of cotton within boll yield components. Crop science, 46: 2076-2080.

genotype × environment interactions for yield and fiber cotton

performance

trials.

environment of Punjab. Pakistan Journal Agricultural Science, 64(1): 59-63.

Iqbal M, Saghir A, Wajad N, Taj M, Bismillah MK,

Campbell BT and Jones MA. 2005. Assessment of quality in

nitrogen rates and sowing dates under diverse agro-

Euphytica,

144(1-2): 69-78.

Cororaton CB and Orden D. 2008. Pakistan's cotton and textile economy: Intersectoral linkages and effects on rural and urban poverty, Research reports 158, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI), Washington, D.C. 107 p.

Deho ZA, Laghari S, Abro S, Khanzada SD and Fakhuruddin. 2012. Effect of sowing dates and picking intervals at boll opening percent, yield and fibre quality of cotton cultivars. Science Technology Development, 31(3): 288-293.

Elayan ED, Sohair Abdalla AMA, Abdel-Gawad Nadia SD and Wageda AEF. 2015. Effect of delaying planting date on yield, fiber and yarn quality properties in some cultivars and promising crosses of Egyptian cotton. American-Eurasian Journal Agriculture and Environmental Sciences, 15(5): 754-763.

Farrukh MS, Shakeel AA, Amir Sl, Shraf MY and Khan HZ. 2009. Effect of row spacing and earliness and yield in cotton. Pakistan Journal Botany, 41(5): 2179-2188 Hakoomat A, Naveed MA, Faiz A, Shakeel A, Maqbool A and Raheel A. 2011. Effect of sowing date, plant spacing and nitrogen application on growth and productivity on cotton crop. International Journal of Scientific and Engineering Research, 2(9): 1-6.

Mubshar H, Abid M, Tauseef M, Asifa H and Karim A. 2012b. High plant density by narrow plant spacing ensures cotton productivity in elite cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) genotypes under severe Cotton Leaf Curl Virus

(CLCV)

infestations.

African

Journal

of

Biotechnology, 11(12): 2869-2878.

Karavina C, Mandumbu R, Parwada C and Mungunyana T. 2012. Variety and planting date effects on the incidence of the relationship between fiber initiation and lint percentage in cotton. Pakistan Journal Botany, 46(6): 2227-2238.

Khalid U, Ayatullah Naimatullah K and Sohrab K. 2016. Genotype-by-sowing date interaction effects on cotton yield and quality in irrigated condition of Dera Ismail Khan, Pakistan. Pakistan Journal Botany, 48(5): 1933-1944.

Khan Uz, Khan Z, Shoaib Ur, Rehman SU, Abid MA, Malik W, Hanif CM, Bilal M, Qanmber G, Latif A, Ashraf J and Farhan U. 2015. Exploitation of germplasm for plant yield improvement in cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L). Journal of Green Physiology Genetics and Genomics, 1(1): 1-10.

Nadeem MA, Ali A, Tahir M, Naeem M, Chadhar AR and Ahmad S. 2010. Effects of nitrogen level and plant spacing on growth and yield of cotton. Pakistan Journal of Life Social Sciences, 8(2): 121-124.

Muddassir M, Jalip MW, Noor MA, Zia MA, Aldosri FO, Zuhaibe AH, Fiaz S, Mubushar M and Zafar MM. 2016. Farmers’ perception of factors hampering maize yield in rain-fed region of Pind Dadan

Iqbal J, Wajid SA, Ahmad A and Arshad M. 2012a.

Khan, Pakistan. Journal of Agricultural Extension, 20

Comparative studies on seed cotton yield in relation to

(2): 1-5.

Journal of Research in Ecology (2018) 6(1): 1691–1702

1701

Abbas et al., 2018 Rahman HR, SA Malik, M Saleem and Hussain F. 2007. Evaluation of seed physical traits in relation to heat tolerance in upland cotton. Pakistan Journal Botany, 39(2): 475-483.

Shakeel A, Hakoomat A, Naveed A and Dilbaugh M. 2009. Effect of cultivars and sowing dates on yield and quality of Gossypium hirsutum L. crop. Journal of Food, Agriculture and Environment, 7(3 and 4): 244-247.

Siebert JD, Steward AM and Leonard BR. 2006.

Comparative growth and yield of cotton planted at various densities and configurations. Agronomy Journal, 98 (3): 562-568.

Steel RGD. 1997. Principles and procedures of statistics: a biometrical approach. McGraw-Hill, New York New York, USA. 400-428 p.

Ullah H, Inayat UA, Mansoor M, Ejaz AK, M Anwar K. 2011. Effect of sowing time and plant spacing on fibre quality and seed cotton yield. Sarhad Journal Agriculture. 27(3): 411-413.

Ullah K, Fateh CO, Shamasuddin T, QammarUddin C and Mohammad MK. 2012. Response of sowing time to various cotton genotypes. Sarhad Journal of Agriculture, 28(3): 279-385.

Wrather JA, Phipps BJ, Stevens WE, Phillips AS and Vories ED. 2008. Cotton planting date and plant population effects on yield and fibre quality in the Mis-

Submit your articles online at ecologyresearch.info

sissippi Delta. Journal of Cotton Science, 12: 1-7

Advantages

Zia-ul-Hassan KA, Kubar I, Rajpar AN, Shah SD, Tunio J, Shah A and Maitlo AA. 2014. Evaluating potassiumuse-efficiency of five cotton genotypes of Pakistan. Pakistan Journal Botany, 46(4): 1237-1242.

     

Easy online submission Complete Peer review Affordable Charges Quick processing Extensive indexing You retain your copyright

submit@ecologyresearch.info www.ecologyresearch.info/Submit.php.

1702

Journal of Research in Ecology (2018) 6(1): 1691–1702